With Ontario's election about eight months away, Premier Kathleen Wynne's approval ratings are near rock bottom, there are two trials linked to her Liberal party in the headlines and the party is trailing in the polls.

But her main opponent, Progressive Conservative Leader Patrick Brown, has his own set of problems. His party is struggling with "internal fist fights" and he's been accused of leading "a war" against his own members.

Controversial nomination meetings have prompted calls to police and a court battle, riding association executives have quit in protest, party elders are going public with their criticism and organized conservative groups are threatening to undermine Brown's chances of beating Wynne when Ontarians vote next June.

"We want to replace Kathleen Wynne, but he's just as bad — probably worse," said Carlos Naldinho, the founder of an online group for conservatives called I'm Out.

Emma McLennan, the former president of the Ottawa West-Nepean riding association, said she's heard of conservatives planning an incredible move in response to Brown's management of the party.

"There are people who are going to vote NDP," she said. "It's just amazing."

McLennan and other peeved conservatives say the turmoil isn't simply party infighting — they say all Ontario voters should pay attention.

"I think the province needs someone with integrity and who brings ethics and is committed to democracy and who respects the people," McLennan said. "If [Brown] doesn't respect the membership ... what's his feeling towards the average voter?"

Upset riding associations

McLennan is among the riding association members who have quit in protest over how Brown and party officials have responded to disputes over candidate nominations.

She and others say party officials dismissed evidence of ballot-stuffing at the riding's May 6 meeting, refused to hold a new meeting after Karma Macgregor won for Ottawa West-Nepean by just 15 votes and didn't allow the defeated candidate to go through with an appeal.

They say Brown isn't keeping his promise for fair and transparent nominations, a claim party officials reject. Brown has acknowledged there are "a few who are disgruntled," but has downplayed the infighting, describing it as a natural consequence of growing and modernizing the party.

Brown has said, 'I actually think our party is more united and larger and more energized than ever before.' (Dave Chidley/Canadian Press)

But former senator Marjory LeBreton worries Brown and his inner circle are alienating riding associations and said they are doing so "at their peril." Those are the party loyalists who hammer in the lawn signs, raise money and go door-to-door to get out the vote, she noted.

LeBreton, known as a strident partisan, said she doesn't want to see Wynne continue as premier, but that she's "not happy with the tactics" Brown is using.

Some frustrated conservatives are aiming to give voters an alternative. The Trillium Party is threatening to peel support away from the PCs, especially in some rural ridings. The Ontario Alliance is another fledgling party whose registration with Elections Ontario is pending.

Bob Yaciuk, who founded Trillium, claims grassroots conservatives are fleeing the PCs for his party, and that he's already recruited more than two dozen candidates. Jack MacLaren has been a Trillium MPP at Queen's Park since Brown kicked him out of the PC caucus in May.

Support could splinter

Yaciuk said Brown isn't trustworthy, citing two positions he's taken that have caused rifts in the party. When campaigning for leader, Brown said he would oppose Wynne's sex education overhaul. When he won, he decided to support it instead. Brown also stunned conservatives at a party convention when he declared that he supports a carbon tax.

Is this true? Why would a conservative party treat social conservatives this way at a time when the province is actually undertaking the re-engineering of gender, without asking anybody? On the other hand, what other channel should social conservatives develop to express their point of view in Parliament?

I am not one to dismiss "outrage" from "within the party" in Ontario anymore because in reality the PCs have blown more winnable elections in recent memory than any other party in Canada

However with that said;
When Brown beat Christine Elliott, she was the last of the "old guard". The Hudak, Eves, Klees party. The majority of his team was largely outsiders to a party that largely had been on the same path since 1990.

The Party was largely populated with those folks who had been around since the Harris days and they actively campaigned against Brown during the leadership race.

He was elected leader to lead and he is 5/6 in by-elections since he was made leader and we haven't even seen a policy convention yet.

Its always good to keep an eye on things because stranger things have happened but thus far Patrick Brown has done what he was elected to do, change the party methodology.

While I certainly dislike when leaders select candidates over that of the riding association, it happens.

Are the social conservatives the same thing as the old Harris crowd? I just wonder. Parties tend to repeat the patterns that brought them success. Sadly, the patterns that brought Harris to power were put in place by Bob Rae, without whom it all would not have been possible.

McGuinty improved on Rae's performance by being oilier. Slimey, even.

But what do we do now? We're deeper in debt than ever, and worse, are saddled with an energy system that is bleeding money. The next government will have to disarm bobby-traps like the minimum wage and other job-destroying changes.

The party seems to be stifling certain voices, but these reports don't tell us anything about the reasons behind the suppression. Are we in the midst of some kind of purge? (Stalin would have waited until after the election.)

Is this not the time to rally the forces, and work it out, fair and square? It is probably the case that some groups will have to be let down later, but that's the way the game is played, isn't it? It often takes persistence.

What are the issues, if any? Is it all just young lawyers looking for their main chance?

Harris just worked hard; He lost in 1990, gathered his socks and worked.
Published his platform a year before the election, visited every riding, and had "crazy ideas" like reducing Ontario's seats in Provincial Parliament from 130 to 103 to save cost.

Lyn McLeod running one of the worst campaigns ever helped as well.

But I digress;

The issue largely spans from the "mothership" in some riding disqualifying candidates, the thing is it largely depends on the riding;

Patrick Brown would have loved to have Joe Oliver in caucus but lost the nomination battle to Roman Baber and it stood or for that matter had Rick Dykstra in caucus now rather than Sam Oosterhoff. As such we are not talking about a systemic problem but rather a case by case one.

In terms of what the issue is;
The gentleman quoted in the article's group can be found here;
http://imout.ca/

They contend Patrick Brown is corrupt and are planning to organize against him;

As there is minimal content on the site above I had to dig with what I was able to find on the site which again was minimal.

They cite corruption, I would assume this pertains to the nominations which results in potential legal battles, they can be found here;

Quote:

Joe Neal, a Durham regional councillor and lawyer wants a judge to overturn a PC party decision to disqualify him as a candidate because he donated money to the Liberals in the past and ran for them in 1985.

A Hamilton PC candidate who claims he lost a riding nomination because of voter fraud and ballot box stuffing coordinated by party officials isn't letting the issue drop.

Now he's asking an Ontario court to review it and consider declaring him the candidate.

Which prompted this;

Quote:

The party is changing how to handle nomination meetings, Dykstra said. PricewaterhouseCoopers will monitor each nomination meeting going forward, and the party's executive will appoint a neutral observer.

An Ontario court judge has ordered that a Hamilton man battling the Ontario PC party in court has to pay the party $136,315 in legal fees.

That ruling against Vikram Singh, who vied for the Hamilton West-Ancaster-Dundas (HWAD) nomination earlier this year, comes as he is asking for a judicial review into what he describes as vote tampering and ballot box stuffing during the riding's nomination meeting in May.

But surely we all quietly accept that this kind of jiggery-pokery at the individual riding level has been common. Remember Iggy getting parachuted into Lakeshore/Parklawn and stomping all over the previously nominated candidate? And, even as we speak, there are trials either going on (at the snail-like pace of Canadian trials) or scheduled involving 'bribery' etc. because the party was trying to get the candidate they wanted into that seat, regardless.

Is this different? I can see that a PC nomination is a lot more valuable now than it has been in the past simply because the sitting government has sunk so low that it is almost inconceivable that Brown is not the next premier.

I can also imagine that Brown doesn't want to do anything to help Wynne, who is obviously quite expert at diverting attention. She made a brilliant move, threatening Brown with legal action over a statement that (I think) another member made. It has since dropped from sight like a stone, but for one day it diluted the number of column inches that were devoted to Wynne's performance in the witness box.

She's as treacherous as a scorpion, so it is understandable that Brown wants to play it safe by avoiding controversy. Brown wants to simply let her sink in the slime of her own swamp. That's what the playbook calls for.

Brown will always get his choice nominated if he wants, but the price is the possible alienation of the local membership, who, after all, help the party in important ways during elections.

It seems so unnecessary to turn your back on people who are energized about the issues. They would include some of your best volunteers. If their candidate has serious problems, you find a way to piece them off. And, above all, you don't let some group split the party's vote!!!! You cut the deal you have to cut even if you mean to double-cross people later. I think of Peter McKay making the deal with David Orchard, which led to his being led around the last PC leadership convention by the tie. It was a good deal to make!

There has to be a better way to organize all these anti-Wynne energies.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forumYou cannot attach files in this forumYou cannot download files in this forum